See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 83

Thread: Illustrious 18 Plays Below and Above Index

  1. #27
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Eastern U S A
    Posts
    6,830


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Galvin View Post
    " ... are you looking for a link to Professor Michael Canjar's paper?"
    Thanx muchly and R.I.P. mathprof'


  2. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by moses View Post
    T3: What would the chart look like with Perferct Instead of Generic Insurance?
    Perfect insurance already considers all the cards seen at their proper weight so no composition dependent adjustments occur.

  3. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by moses View Post
    I understand. But would you insure a 16 at the same TC as a 20?
    Yes. All exposed cards and every seen card has been counted at their proper weight for perfect insurance. It doesn't matter if they are in your hand, in the discard tray or on the table.

    The counts that have neutral cards and miscounted cards can be made more accurate with adjustments to improperly weighted cards by tag. Once adjusted situations are no longer part of the general situation the general index changes because those situations that were adjusted are no longer part of what is left. That changes the average of the set of situations in the general set. If you weighted all the situations in Caraculo's post by frequency and averaged them their indices will add to the general index.

  4. #30


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by moses View Post
    Perfect Insurance. Tens +2. All others -1. RC is >4 x the number of decks shuffled.
    Signs backwards, no?

    Don

  5. #31


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Tens are -2. All other are PLUS 1.

    Don

  6. #32


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Signs backwards, no?

    Don
    In my opinion the better way is to tag tens as +2 and non-tens as -1. Then by knowing the number of tens/non-tens remaining to be dealt, the running count can be computed without regard for number of decks.

    Examples:
    36 non-tens(-1), 16 tens(+2) ---- running count = 36*(-1) + 16*2 = -4 (happens to be starting composition of a single deck)
    72 non-tens(-1), 32 tens(+2) ---- running count = 72*(-1) + 32*2 = -8 (happens to be starting composition of a double deck)
    8 non-tens(-1), 5 tens(+2) ---- running count = 8*(-1) + 5*2 = +2 (no matter how many decks at the start of a full shoe)

    Mathematically when a negative card is removed, minus a minus results in a positive so running count increases. When a positive card is removed, minus a plus results in a negative so running count decreases. In tagging non-tens as +1 and tens as -2, removal is the only consideration. Tagging like this is relative to what has been removed whereas reversing the sign of the tags is relative to what remains to be dealt and includes a way of computing a starting point.

    Either method works but I prefer the first way.

    k_c

  7. #33


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by k_c View Post
    In my opinion the better way is to tag tens as +2 and non-tens as -1. Then by knowing the number of tens/non-tens remaining to be dealt, the running count can be computed without regard for number of decks.

    Examples:
    36 non-tens(-1), 16 tens(+2) ---- running count = 36*(-1) + 16*2 = -4 (happens to be starting composition of a single deck)
    72 non-tens(-1), 32 tens(+2) ---- running count = 72*(-1) + 32*2 = -8 (happens to be starting composition of a double deck)
    8 non-tens(-1), 5 tens(+2) ---- running count = 8*(-1) + 5*2 = +2 (no matter how many decks at the start of a full shoe)

    Mathematically when a negative card is removed, minus a minus results in a positive so running count increases. When a positive card is removed, minus a plus results in a negative so running count decreases. In tagging non-tens as +1 and tens as -2, removal is the only consideration. Tagging like this is relative to what has been removed whereas reversing the sign of the tags is relative to what remains to be dealt and includes a way of computing a starting point.

    Either method works but I prefer the first way.

    k_c
    I understand your point of view, but to me, this is a straight counting concept. The cards fall, and you count them as you seem them. If you WANT to take insurance, non-tens are plus, tens are minus. You reach 4 x the number of starting decks and you insure; you're not yet there, you don't. Simplest possible way, no?

    Don

  8. #34


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    I understand your point of view, but to me, this is a straight counting concept. The cards fall, and you count them as you seem them. If you WANT to take insurance, non-tens are plus, tens are minus. You reach 4 x the number of starting decks and you insure; you're not yet there, you don't. Simplest possible way, no?

    Don
    Do you mean that one needs to keep a separate count of the number of tens/non tens that have been dealt, in addition to that person's normal count eg Hilo, in order to use Perfect Insurance?

  9. #35


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by NB10 View Post
    Do you mean that one needs to keep a separate count of the number of tens/non tens that have been dealt, in addition to that person's normal count eg Hilo, in order to use Perfect Insurance?
    Yes.

    Don

  10. #36


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    I understand your point of view, but to me, this is a straight counting concept. The cards fall, and you count them as you seem them. If you WANT to take insurance, non-tens are plus, tens are minus. You reach 4 x the number of starting decks and you insure; you're not yet there, you don't. Simplest possible way, no?

    Don
    Just about the same thing - start out count at -4 * (number of decks) and insure when (running) count is above 0. (Count at 0 is zero EV.) As you say when a non-ten falls running count increases by 1. (Removing a minus card adds to running count.) When a ten falls running count decreases by 2 (Removing a positive card running count decreases.) It's just about how the sign of the tags is defined.

    k_c

  11. #37


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by k_c View Post
    Just about the same thing - start out count at -4 * (number of decks) and insure when (running) count is above 0. (Count at 0 is zero EV.) As you say when a non-ten falls running count increases by 1. (Removing a minus card adds to running count.) When a ten falls running count decreases by 2 (Removing a positive card running count decreases.) It's just about how the sign of the tags is defined.

    k_c
    I believe this running count system is correctly called the "insurance count". p49 Exhibit CAA explains the count in... detail.

  12. #38


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by therefinery View Post
    I believe this running count system is correctly called the "insurance count". p49 Exhibit CAA explains the count in... detail.
    Was around for ages and ages before James. Surely not new in CAA.

    Don

  13. #39


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by DSchles View Post
    Was around for ages and ages before James. Surely not new in CAA.

    Don
    Your point? He gives it a nice treatment on p49. You're welcome to reference the page in BJA where you cover it.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-18-2008, 08:38 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-26-2004, 05:37 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.